科研之友
微信
新浪微博
Facebook
分享链接
摘要
Purpose. To compare pressures generated by 2 different cement pressurisers at various locations in the proximal femur. %26lt;br%26gt;Methods. Two groups of 5 synthetic femurs were used, and 6 pressure sensors were placed in the femur at 20-mm intervals proximally to distally. Cement was filled into the femoral canal retrogradely using a cement gun with either the half-moon pressuriser or the femoral canal pressuriser. Maximum pressures and pressure time integrals (cumulative pressure over time) of the 2 pressurisers were compared. %26lt;br%26gt;Results. At all sensors, the half-moon pressuriser produced higher maximum pressures and pressure time integrals than the femoral canal pressuriser, but the difference was significant only at sensor 1 (proximal femur). This may result in reduced cement interdigitation in the proximal femur. %26lt;br%26gt;Conclusion. The half-moon pressuriser produced higher maximum cementation pressures and pressure time integrals than the femoral canal pressuriser in the proximal femur region, which is critical for rotational stability of the implant and prevention of implant fracture.
- 出版日期2014
